<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2019 (8) TMI 1474 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287341</link>
    <description>Securities-law proceedings were found unsustainable where adjudication was initiated and concluded after an inordinate, unexplained delay, even though no express limitation period was prescribed. The text states that enforcement powers must still be exercised within a reasonable time, and that prolonged delay can prejudice the validity of a show cause notice and penalty orders. It further notes that disclosure under the takeover regulations was treated as adequate market information, while the alleged insider-trading non-compliance was considered technical rather than substantive. On those facts, the notice and penalty orders were quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2020 10:51:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=609777" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (8) TMI 1474 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287341</link>
      <description>Securities-law proceedings were found unsustainable where adjudication was initiated and concluded after an inordinate, unexplained delay, even though no express limitation period was prescribed. The text states that enforcement powers must still be exercised within a reasonable time, and that prolonged delay can prejudice the validity of a show cause notice and penalty orders. It further notes that disclosure under the takeover regulations was treated as adequate market information, while the alleged insider-trading non-compliance was considered technical rather than substantive. On those facts, the notice and penalty orders were quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287341</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>